Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 4/24/2009 12:57:41 PM EDT
Please  contact your representatives immediately about these two bills.

From the NRA website:

Two North Carolina Gun Bills to be Considered Next Week!
 
Friday, April 24, 2009
 
Please Contact the Members of the Senate Judiciary II Committee Today!

Two bills of vital interest to NRA members are scheduled to be heard in the Senate Judiciary II Committee on Thursday, April 30.  


The first, Senate Bill 928, is a Castle Doctrine self-defense bill.  This legislation, introduced by State Senator Doug Berger (D-7), would ensure that all law-abiding citizens have a right to use force, including deadly force, against violent attackers in their homes, as well as anywhere else they have a right to be.  S928 ensures that those afforded the protections under this bill would be immune from both criminal prosecution as well as civil action.  


The other bill, Senate Bill 987, seeks to expand the current law regulating the “safe” storage of firearms.  S987, introduced by State Senator Malcolm Graham (D-40), would impose regulations that would greatly diminish the ability of law-abiding, responsible gun owners to keep firearms in the home in a state suitable for defensive use.  


Basically, the only ways to ensure one does not run afoul of the law proposed under S987 would be to have every firearm in the home “kept unloaded in a locked box or container, with the ammunition stored separately,” or to have all firearms “kept unloaded and equipped with a tamper-resistant mechanical lock or other safety device.”  Either “option” would render useless any firearms kept in the home for personal protection.  The key to firearms being suitable for personal protection is to have them readily available to law-abiding, responsible gun owners.  These two storage “options” would add precious time to the points between when someone realizes they need a firearm to defend his or her life or the lives of loved ones, and when that firearm is actually in a condition when it can be used for such a purpose.  Unlocking a secured firearm, then loading it, can take as long as several minutes, which are minutes violent criminals can easily exploit to their advantage.  


Please contact the members of the Senate Judiciary II Committee TODAY and respectfully urge them to support S928 and to oppose S987.  







Link Posted: 4/24/2009 5:57:52 PM EDT
Basically, the only ways to ensure one does not run afoul of the law proposed under S987 would be to have every firearm in the home “kept unloaded in a locked box or container, with the ammunition stored separately,” or to have all firearms “kept unloaded and equipped with a tamper-resistant mechanical lock or other safety device.” Either “option” would render useless any firearms kept in the home for personal protection. The key to firearms being suitable for personal protection is to have them readily available to law-abiding, responsible gun owners. These two storage “options” would add precious time to the points between when someone realizes they need a firearm to defend his or her life or the lives of loved ones, and when that firearm is actually in a condition when it can be used for such a purpose. Unlocking a secured firearm, then loading it, can take as long as several minutes, which are minutes violent criminals can easily exploit to their advantage.

After reading the bill it would appear that you would be charged if a minor killed or injured someone using your weapons, if they weren't in the condition noted above.

Note that the bill has no co-sponsors.  Hopefully it won't go anywhere.
Link Posted: 4/26/2009 10:03:44 PM EDT
I received the email from the NRA about S987, and was pretty concerned. After reading the bill, though I don't like it, is is nowhere near as ominous as it has been described. From what I have read, the law would apply to "unattended firearms" to which minors could have access. The part I have not seen mentioned is:

"Nothing in this section shall prohibit a person from carrying a firearm on his or her body, or placed in such close proximity that it can be used as easily and quickly as if carried on the body."

Here is the source: http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2009&BillID=sb987

While I will catch some flak here, if there is  chance a child will get access to your firearms, they should be locked up. The part that they should be unloaded, with ammo stored separately is unnecessary. If a firearm is tored in a safe, I don't have a problem with it being loaded, and would prefer if the law reflected that.
Link Posted: 4/26/2009 10:11:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SparticleBrane:
Basically, the only ways to ensure one does not run afoul of the law proposed under S987 would be to have every firearm in the home “kept unloaded in a locked box or container, with the ammunition stored separately,” or to have all firearms “kept unloaded and equipped with a tamper-resistant mechanical lock or other safety device.” Either “option” would render useless any firearms kept in the home for personal protection. The key to firearms being suitable for personal protection is to have them readily available to law-abiding, responsible gun owners. These two storage “options” would add precious time to the points between when someone realizes they need a firearm to defend his or her life or the lives of loved ones, and when that firearm is actually in a condition when it can be used for such a purpose. Unlocking a secured firearm, then loading it, can take as long as several minutes, which are minutes violent criminals can easily exploit to their advantage.

After reading the bill it would appear that you would be charged if a minor killed or injured someone using your weapons, if they weren't in the condition noted above.

Note that the bill has no co-sponsors.  Hopefully it won't go anywhere.


I'm still trying to figure out under what conditions a gun owner could be charged under this proposed law. It doesn't apply if the guns are stolen:

"This section shall not apply if the minor obtained the firearm as a result of an unlawful entry by any person."

So, how does a child that is a lawful visitor in the home of a gun owner get their hands on a gun?
Link Posted: 4/29/2009 5:31:05 PM EDT
Not securing your guns per the bill

Link Posted: 4/30/2009 2:50:06 AM EDT
the bill changes current law in the following way...

currently the law only allows prosecution for negligence if the minor that gets your gun lives with you...

the change would apply to minors that do not... so if grand kids visit or neighborhood kids etc... thought under current law, i grantee they will still find a way to charge you if you are negligent...
Top Top